The Wandering Minstrel

This is my letter to the Assembly Committee on Public Safety as they prepare to hear Assembly Bill 357, the Right to Carry bill.

Dear Assembly Member *******,

The purpose of this correspondence is to encourage you to support Assembly Bill AB 357 – Firearms: License to carry concealed firearm. As you may know, current state law (PC § 12050) requires a concealed carry applicant to satisfy four qualifications: Good Moral Character, Good Cause, Residence Verification and Firearms Safety Training.

The second item above, Good Cause, is interpreted by the Attorney General’s office, to mean that “a fear for one’s own safety” is not a good cause. This is a bad interpretation for many reasons, not the least of which is the high violent crime rate in California and the tendency of criminals to victimize those weaker than them. Coupling the crime rate to the dismal response times to 911 calls by law enforcement agencies, and you have a pretty reasonable “good cause” to arm yourself. But, the absolute best cause is the right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States.

I think that the Founder’s original intentions in writing the Second Amendment to the Constitution are as valid today as they were in the time the Amendment was written. Many contemporary politicians do not understand the amendment, so I offer the following:

The Second Amendment text is as follows:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

That’s good - the Founders boiled it down to specific, unambiguous language. In it, there are five key nouns - ‘militia,’ ‘state,’ ‘right,’ ‘people‘ and ‘arms.’ There are two key verbs - ‘keep‘ and ‘bear.’ Keep these keywords in mind as you continue to read.

The phrase “the right of the people” also appears in the First Amendment – “Congress shall make no law . . . abridging . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” The Fourth Amendment guarantees: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated . . . .”

Opponents of Second Amendment rights want you to think that this identical wording means something different in the First and Fourth Amendments. You can’t have it one way with freedom of dissent and freedom from search and seizure, and a completely different meaning when it comes to the ‘right of the people‘ to keep and bear arms.

The constitutional text distinguishes between “the people,” “the militia,” and the “States.” The Second Amendment refers to “a well regulated militia,” but the right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed to “the people.”

That’s quite clear: militia does not equal people. The ability of the militia to provide security on behalf of the state depends on the right of the people to own and bear arms. The ability of individuals to provide for their own security, likewise, depends on this right.

The Second Amendment refers to the right to “keep” arms (such as at home) as well as to “bear” arms (meaning to carry them). Protected arms include commonly-kept firearms that one can keep and carry for lawful purposes, such as ordinary rifles, handguns, and shotguns, and not crew-served or heavy weapons.

Despite laws to the contrary, every law-abiding citizen who has reached majority should have the right to own and carry his/her gun at all times.

And now, the meaning of “state” . . .

The Amendment declares a well regulated militia to be necessary to the security of a “free state,” which means a free country, and is not restricted to a State government.

All fifty states in the Union are part of the Founders “free state.” Clearly, the State of California is a part of the Union.

Of course, the scope of the above argument is beyond the scope of AB357. All we, the people of California, ask, is that you change the key phrase “may issue” to “shall issue.”

Very Respectfully,

Is it just me, or do those ADT and Broadview TV commercials inaccurately portray the demographics of home invaders? Each and every one of their commercials, going back to when Broadview was Brinks, depict some dumb white guy breaking and entering the homes of helpless women and children. While there are probably plenty of white people out there who would do that sort of thing, it seems to me that the likelihood of the majority of home invaders to be white, as is the case in the TV spots, is simply not in keeping with actual home invader demographics. Why is it not politically incorrect to represent the criminal element as white people?

The entire concept of these commercials rests with the hope that the invader will be frightened off by an alarm. Perhaps in some cases, that might be true, but if the perp is high on meth and/or some other intoxicants, an alarm sounding might not alter his original intentions. I would find little comfort in an alarm going off and having the security company call me to see if I needed help. Who needs a middle man to call 9-1-1?

My answer to the guy calling me to see if I needed help would be, “Yes, please. Send the cops and the coroner. I just put several 158 grain hollow-point .357 magnum rounds into this yahoo who busted through the back door.” Better yet, I could make the 9-1-1 call myself.

I thought that it was about time that I got a holster for Jerry Lee for a little extra safety. I’ve been keeping him handy when at home. I always try to handle the gun with safety in mind, but there’s always that remote chance of screwing up.

So, I stopped at Turner’s Outdoorsman today to pick up this Bianchi AccuMold® revolver holster. It is a perfect fit, hides the trigger and secures the hammer in place.

When I went to one of the local sporting goods outlets today, I was surprised to see eight boxes of .45 Auto ammunition on the shelf. I got the clerk to sell me half of them. They were not particularly cheap, either.

As a hedge against the shortage of ammunition, I add to the stockpile when funds and ammo are available. I scored some 9mm reloads a couple of weeks ago and some .357 magnum the week before. Now, while I don’t want to hoard ammo for the sake of having it on the shelf, I do want to be able to head off to the range on a regular basis for target practice as well as having an adequate supply of personal protection rounds, just in case.

In the clickable image to the right, you can see from top to bottom, lock box (valuables, not necessarily firearms related), handguns (various), handgun ammunition, long guns (4 shotguns, 2 12 and 2 20 gauge), Fat Man and Little boy (and magazines), 20 gauge shotgun cartridges and 12 gauge shotgun cartridges.

The table is all set to enjoy this sumptuous meal - Roasted tenderloin of pork with asparagus risotto, acorn squash and fresh grilled pineapple. I’m eatin’ - don’t bother me.

We’ve been reading about the possibility of a Federal ban on one-handed opening folding knives. Hedging our bets on whether or not that will come to fruition, the Better Half and I went out and got a couple of these nice Schrade 3½ inch blade folding knives. I was attracted to this particular knife because of the sardonicus embedded into the handle. Skulls fit in with the theme of this website, so in the cart they went - two of ‘em.

Here is my new self-defense duo - ‘Jerry Lee‘ and ‘Mack the Knife.’

Clickable image.